Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
Why did they call it ’delocalized’?
I haven’t seen them admit this, but I suppose it must be meant in contrast to the de Rham cohomology of just the direct sum of the fixed loci (which would be localized to the fixed points), i.e. without taking the quotient by the residual $G$-action (which mixes these loci and hence “de-localizes” them).
In any case, this choice of terminology probably contributed to keeping the true nature of the theory a public mystery.
Thanks!
1 to 4 of 4